MISSIONAMONG OTHER FAITHS:

AN ORTHODOX PERSPECTIVE

TheoverallapproachoftheEasternOrthodoxChurchtothepeopleoftheotherfaithsis the result of her theology. Theimportanceoftheology, nevertheless, doesnotnecessarilymean surrender to a “theology from above”. As St. MaximostheConfessorhasstated: “a theology without action is a theology of the Devil.”TherearetwodistinctivecharacteristicsoftheEasternOrthodox theology which determine the Church’s attitude toward the other religions: her ecclesiological awareness, the pneumatological dimension of her understanding of the Holy Trinity, and her teaching of theosis.

The Orthodox Church, without setting aside her conviction that she is “the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”, and her task to witness to the whole Gospel to the whole world; without forgetting that her Lord Jesus Christ is “the way, the truth and the life” (Jn 14:6); she humbly believes that although she is the authentic bearer of the apostolic tradition she is not buta simple servant in the “mission” of God. On the basis of “the economy of the Holy Spirit”, side by side with the “economy of Christ/the Word”the Orthodox believe that God uses not only the Church, but many other powers of the world for His/Her mission for the salvation of humankind and the entire creation. Afterall, theHolySpirit, the “Spirit of Truth,” leads us to the “whole truth” (Jn 16:13) and“blowswhereverHe/Shewills” (Jn 3:8), thusembracingthewholeofcosmos.

With the contribution, therefore, of Pneumatology (in fact with a dynamic interpretation of Christology through Pneumatology) the theological vision becomes wider, and the missionary task transcends to new previously unimaginable areas of action: the emphasis is no longer placed on mere proselytistic activities, but on full scale conversion of both the Christian evangelizers, and those to whom the witness is rendered. In this way a total transformation occurs and the implementation of God’s Rule becomes a reality, since according to the Biblical magna carta (Mt 25), God judges humanity with criteria other than the conventional religious ones.

With the “Economy of the Spirit” the narrow boundaries of the Church are widened, and the cultural (and religious) superiority syndromes give their place to a “common witness” and a humble “inter-faith dialogue”. Defining the mission dei on the basis of Jn 21 the Orthodox believe that God in God’s own self is a life of communion and that God’s involvement in history (and consequently our missionary task) aims at drawing humanity and creation in general into this communion with God’s very life. This ultimate expression of koinoniaand love through this kind of “inter-faith” encounter is transferred to the whole world not as dogmas or ethical commands, but as a communion of love. This openness toward the faithful of other religions is also reinforced by the unique Orthodox anthropology, expressed in such terms as theosis or deification. The human nature in the Orthodox tradition is not a closed, autonomous entity (as it was believed in the post-Augustinian western Christianity, which was trapped by the static diachotomy of “nature”-“grace”), but a dynamic reality, determined in its very existence by its relationship to God. Determined by a vision of how to “know” God, to “participate” in His life, and of course to be “saved” neither by an extrinsic action of God nor through the rational cognition of propositional truths, but by “becoming God”, this soteriological notion is much more inclusive to non-Christians than the old conventional exclusivist mission theology of Western Christianity. Together with the relational understanding of the “social” (Cappadocian) Trinity, the Orthodox permanent task (but also a “given” at God’s creation of humans in His “image”) of theosis is not a neo-platonic return to an impersonal One, but a true continuation of the biblical expressions of life “in Christ” and “in communion of the Holy Spirit”.

This“pneumatologicaland deification understandingofmission” hasnothingtodowithsyncretism. Those who believe in the importance of the inter-faith dialogue, mainly on the basis of the “economy of the Spirit”, and the Orthodox also on the basis of the anthropology of deification,insist that the mutual respect, and peaceful relations and co-existence with faithful of other beliefs (or even non-believers) does not by any means lead to the naïve affirmation that all religious are the same.Onthecontrary, thedialogueandtheco-operationarenecessary, exactlybecausethe various religious traditions are different and promote different visions of the reality. In the inter-faith dialogue the encounter between religions (more precisely between faithful of different religions) is understood as an “encounter of mutual commitments and responsibilities” on the common goal of humanity to restore communion with God, and thus restoring the rule of God “on earth as it is in heaven”.

This kind of Christian witness does not aim at the creation of a new “pan-religion”, or a new “world religion”, as it is quite naively claimed by the ultra-conservatives from all Christian confessions, but would inevitably lead to a “communion of faithful from different religious traditions”. After all, this is the ultimate goal of the divine economy, as it is clearly stated in our normative biblical foundations (cf. Eph 1:10, Cοl 3:11 etc).

This endeavor does not only decrease the enmity and the hostilities between people of different religions; it is also a call to faithful to engage drastically to the world social development. Above all it makes the “other” partner in mission, not an “object” of mission. Viewing the faithful of other religions as co-workers in God’s mission, the Christian synergetically assists in the realization of the work of the Holy Spirit for a new world reality, a global communion of love, which transcends his/her personal as well as cultural and ethnic ego. The common Christian witness unceasingly promotes the salvific power of God through Jesus Christ, but does not obliterates God’s dynamic involvement through the Holy Spirit into the whole created world. It is a useful means to minister the unity within a more and more divided world.

The place of Orthodoxy, as all preeminent Orthodox theologians insist, is notin the margin of history, but at the center of social fermentations as a pioneer agent in the reconciling work of the Holy Spirit. Mission is conceived by the Orthodox as a response to the call of the Triune God for a common journey and a participation in the love of God. Hence the importance it gives to martyrdom and to the doxological praise of God in Liturgy, which is not only a springboard of mission (this is what the Orthodox call liturgy after the liturgy), but a proleptic manifestation of God’s Kingdom and an offering and thanksgiving for the oikoumene, the entire world regardless of religious convictions.

If one surveys the diverse religio-cultural contexts of various Orthodox Churches, both Eastern and Oriental, one can observe that there is a long history of peaceful co-existence between Orthodox and people of other religions. When the Crusaders in the middle ages launched that dreadful campaign to liberate the Holy Land, while passing from Constantinople and its surroundings they accused the Orthodox of “being too tolerant toward the Muslims” (!) The Indian example is even more telling,certainly deserving special mention. India is the home of major religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, and despite this there is no historical incident of any real conflict between Christianity and the other faiths. The life and historical memory of a genuinely Indian and OrientalChurch like the Malankara Orthodox Church, for instance, would illustrate the peaceful co-existence and good relations between Christianity and other religions in India.

Ironically the Orthodox in India experienced oppression and persecution for the first time in their history, not from Hindus or Buddhists but from the colonial Portuguese Christian (Roman Catholic) authorities in the 16th century. And in addition, this colonial Western Catholic mission divided the IndianChurch which was one and united until that time.

Indian Christianity maintained naturally the uniqueness of its Orthodox faith while in social and cultural matters it was fully inculturated in the indigenous Indian context. Furthermore, the profound philosophical-spiritual-ethical context of Hindu, Buddhist and Jain religions provided support for the spiritual-ethical ethos of the Orthodox Christianity. There had always been a dialogue of life and an underlying, though not always articulated, feeling of fraternity, mutual respect and a sense of common ground between Orthodox Christianity and the major religions of India. The old “western” aggressive “mission paradigm” with its brutal and intolerant attitudes (from the Roman Catholic and the Protestant missions) did a lot of harm in India. As a consequence, in recent years many contemporary Indian theologians attempt to draw from the wealth of the Indian philosophical and spiritual tradition and the long legacy of mutual respect and openness experienced by the Orthodox presence.

(prepared by a group of Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, led by Petros Vassiliadis, Niki Papageorgiou, George Kondortha, and Nikos Dimitriadis)